企业的社会责任外文文献翻译
企业社会责任英语范文
1.求一遍企业社会责任的英语作文2.社会责任对企业来说是非常重要的英语作文Clarkson M.A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating eorporate social performance.Academy of Managernent Review,1995. 2、Jones T M.Instrumental stakeholder theory:A synthesis of ethics and economies.Academy of Management Review,1995. 3、Carroll A B.Corporate social responsibility:Evolution of a Definitional Construct.Businessand Society,1999,38. 4、James Brummer,Corporate Responsibility and Legitimacy,Greenwood Press,1991.。
3.翻译一段文字企业社会责任4.一篇关于社会责任的英语小短文5.帮我翻译英文,急用,谢谢This article analyzes corporate social responsibility and its the development course, then it introduces the situation how the corporations fulfill the social responsibility and main questions。
Finally, it raises suggestions to solve the questions from improving entrepreneur's social responsibility vigorously, letting governments lead role in advancing corporations social responsibility and public supervise them。
外文文献翻译--道德语言与企业社会责任报告-其他专业
外文文献翻译译稿2：道德语言与企业社会责任报告玛丽安雷诺兹克莉丝蒂尤萨斯文献原文标题：Moral Discourse and Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting原文出处：Journal of Business Ethics (2008) 78:47–64发表或出版时间：2008年6月作者姓名：MaryAnn Reynolds Kristi Yuthas 国籍：美国摘要：本文检视自愿的企业社会责任（CSR ）报告作为一种道德语言。
它探索了利益相关者如何选择不同的看法所导致的对过程和内容负责的报告。
我们对比了传统的利益相关者理论和新兴的观点，传统的观点是把利益相关者看作为外部机构与公司的一种社会契约，而以一种新兴的观点看，就是公司和公司员工之间的利益关系。
这样就把利益相关者从一个外部机构转变成企业活动的组成部分之一。
我们研究了这些替代利益相关者视觉如何产生不同的规范要求，管理过程，和沟通交流。
我们讨论CSR责任报告书中的一些模型：EMAS， ISO14000体系， SA8000，AA1000，全球永续性报告协会，哥本哈根协议。
我们研究这些模型如何和利益相关者的哲学相关联，并且发现他们基本上符合传统的观点,但从一个关系利益相关者视角来看，仍远远达不到要求规定的道德约定。
采用一种关系观要求于利益相关者参与在报告上和在语篇方面的有关公司核心使命、价值观以及等管理制度。
哈贝马斯的沟通行为理论提供了利益相关者参与此类道德话语的指南。
关键词：利益相关者参与利益相关者报告关系利益相关者的角度企业社会责任沟通行为理论伦理学介绍：通过此篇文章，我们把哈贝马斯的沟通行为理论（1984；1987；1990）看作一种工具，通过它来评论目前的各种企业社会责任报告方面的程度体现——这些报告要求闪光的道德的话语。
我们提供一段简短的关于理论的关键要素和社会理论。
在此基础上，我们探讨了细节，因为它们可以被运用于企业社会责任报告。
关于中国企业社会责任的英文作文
关于中国企业社会责任的英文作文Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is becoming an increasingly important issue for businesses in China. As the country continues to develop and grow, there is a growing awareness of the impact that businesses can have on society and the environment. In recent years, there has been a shift towards a more sustainable and socially responsible approach to business. This has been driven by a number of factors, including pressure from consumers, investors, and government regulations.One of the key drivers of CSR in China has been the increasing focus on environmental issues. Pollution and environmental degradation have become major concerns in recent years, and businesses are being held accountable for their impact on the environment. Companies are now expected to take steps to reduce their carbon footprint, minimize waste and pollution, and conserve natural resources. This is not only good for the environment, but it can also have a positive impact on a company's reputation and bottom line.Another important aspect of CSR in China is the focus on social issues. With the country's rapid economic growth, there is a growing divide between the rich and poor, and social inequality has become a major concern. Many companies arenow taking steps to address these issues, through initiatives such as job training programs, community outreach, and charitable donations. By giving back to the community and supporting those in need, companies can help to create a more inclusive and sustainable society.In addition to environmental and social issues, ethical business practices are also a key component of CSR in China. With the rise of social media and increasing transparency, companies are under more scrutiny than ever before. Unethical behavior, such as corruption, fraud, and human rights abuses, can have serious consequences for a company's reputation and bottom line. By adhering to high ethical standards and promoting transparency and accountability, companies can build trust with their stakeholders and enhance their reputation in the long term.Overall, the concept of CSR is gaining traction in China, as more and more companies recognize the importance of taking a socially responsible approach to business. By focusing on environmental, social, and ethical issues, companies can not only create a positive impact on society and the environment but also enhance their own long-term sustainability and competitiveness. Ultimately, CSR is about more than just doing the right thing –it's also about creating value for shareholders, employees, customers, and society as a whole.。
企业社会责任信息披露中英文对照外文翻译文献
企业社会责任信息披露中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)原文The Supply of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure Among US FirmsIntroductionCorporate social responsibility CSR activity is an area of intense and increasing interest both on the practice and academic fronts Investor interest in rms that engage in these activities has grown dramatically Between 1995 and 2005 investments of professionally managed assets grew from 7 trillion to 244 trillion while the share of these assets investedin socially responsible investments grew from 639 billion to 229 trillion Social Investment Forum [SIF] 2006 At the same time large institutional investors and multistakeholder groups –including the UN Principles for Responsible Investment project the Global Reporting Initiative GRI 2006 and the CERES a coalition of investors and public interest groups –have focused attention on the materiality of social and environmental information to equity analysis The magnitude and growth of socially responsible investing SRI assets has driven an equally dramatic growth in the need for information The objective of this study is to document the disclosure patterns of CSR by US rmsInvestors are not the only interested parties CSR activity provides an increasing focus of product development and marketing practitioners Research demonstrates that certain types of CSR activity produce value for rms in terms of brand loyalty and marketing advantages Brown and Dacin 1997 Sen and Bhattacharya 2001 As Handleman and Arnold 1999 p 36 notein any community it is common to nd retailers donating to local charities sponsoring little league sports teams and proudly displaying the national ag These actions demonstrate the retailers adherence to unwritten but powerful normative rules of acceptable social conduct such as becoming involved with the community and promoting national pride While the question of what exactly motivates rms to engage in CSR practices is a matter for ongoing research it is clear from the growthin both SRI assets and customer markets for socially responsible goods that there is a need for information on these practices The historical emphasis of traditional nancial information does not answer the needs of these parties who require information not only about future earnings but also about the rms social and environmental responsibility and interactions with the environment and home communities Adams 2004 Anderson et al 2005 The concern with non-nancial factors as well as with equity returns results in a demand for greater accountability from managers According to the SIF p 5 [i]ssues now occupying mainstream consciousness–corporate governance transparency accountability and greater disclosure – have long been central to the practice of social investingMost of the work in this area is directed at examining disclosures from European and Australian rms and nearly all multi-national studies indicate international differences in disclosure behavior In North America Cormier and Magnan 1999 proposed a costbenet approach to environmental disclosures The costs are the costs that other parties other than shareholders will use the information and the benets are the reduction in information asymmetry between managers and shareholders Cormier and Magnan 1999 tested this on a sample of Canadian rms and found that variables such as a rms reliance on capital markets and the trading volume for its stock were associated with increased environmentaldisclosure They also conclude that environmental disclosures are increasing over time and that the increased disclosure in Canada could be a function of the less litigious reporting environment found in Canada as opposed to the United States Alnajjar 2000 examined the 1990 social responsibility disclosures of Fortune 500 companies He found that size and protability affected the quality and quantity of disclosure Since there have been a number of changes in the disclosure environment since 1990 when the data was collected for the Alnajjar 2000 study and since the Cormier and Magnan 1999 looked at Canadian rms it is not clear how US corporations in the 2000s have responded to these increased demands for CSR information Furthermore prior research evaluating the content of CSR disclosures has focused primarily on a single reporting format generally the annual report more recently the corporate website Gray et al 1995 has suggested that the use of a single format for analysis purposes may be signicantly limiting the understanding that can be derived about CSR disclosure behavior We therefore extend this literature by exploring the entire identiable body of public disclosures made by the sample rms during 2004 A major contribution of our paper is the development of a means to assess directly the emphasis that management places on disseminating a given type of information prior research has largely relied upon frequency of disclosure alone as a proxy for emphasis In this paper we evaluate the state of reporting of social and environmentalresponsibility often known as corporate social responsibility or CSR reporting among a sample of US rms to determine what types of information are being provided and through what means of transmission We perform a content analysis on the disclosures made by a size-and industry-stratied sample of 50 publicly traded US rms during 2004 Results suggest that companies disclose a wide variety of CSR information through mandated and voluntary media Consistent with prior research we nd size-and industry-driven differences in disclosure behavior Our results suggest differences in the pattern and volume of disclosure in US rms when compared with other studies examining global enterprisesIn the next section we review the relevant theory and research and present the research questions and hypotheses Then we describe the research method and discuss the results We conclude with the implications of the study for reporting activists accounting rms regulators and academics who are reconsidering the nature of corporate reporting of non-nancial informationLiterature review research questions and hypothesesIt is difcult from an academic and theoretical perspective to disentangle the differences between a rms decision to engage in CSR activities and the decision on why how and when to report on those activities to stakeholders The choice of broad theoretical framework depends on whether the researcher approaches the question of CSR from aneconomic or an ethical standpoint Cetindamar and Husoy 2007 Ethical theories indicate that these activities should be promoted because they are the right thing to doEconomic theories indicate that these activities should be promoted only to the degree that they create shareholder wealth through increasing protVirtually all theoretical approaches carry the implication that it is not enough to partake of a CSR action it is necessary then to disseminate information about the action that has been taken A matter of signicant difference between the theories pertains to what actions should be taken and who should be informed of them To some extent the answer to the rst drives the answer to the second if the primary goal of the activity is to enlist the support of a particular party the rm will of necessity publicize the activity through channels likely to reach that party Therefore before launching an exploration of the approaches to disclosure we offer a brief overview of the why of CSR activity Neo-classical economicsBird et al 2007 adopt a traditional economic approach to the question suggesting that managers should apply net present value NPV analysis to all potential CSR activities and take only the actions that result in a positive NPV and thus increase shareholder wealth An important element of this theory in the CSR context is the neo-classical notion that the shareholder is the only stakeholder of signicant interest This study nds that markets are slow to impound the valuation implications ofnon-event-type actions into market prices with the exception of diversity initiatives While the authors do not explicitly consider the matter of information dissemination the implication of their approach is that disclosure should take place through the channels to which shareholders are accustomed ie mandatory lings such as annual reports and 10-Ks A problematic issue for the traditional neo-classical approach to CSR is that unlike production decisions CSR activities and their outcomes may not yield the mathematical tractability necessary for reliable NPV analysisMarketing strategyAnother stream of inquiry that suggests that CSR may be motivated mainly by wealth concerns is found in the marketing literature see Robin and Reidenbach 1987 for an extensive survey of this literature Brown and Dacin 1997 provide empirical evidence that consumer beliefs about products are inuenced by the information that they possess both about corporate ability the producers competitive advantage and about the producers CSR even though the CSR policies are often unrelated to the companys ability to produce Both items are key elements in creating a good corporate reputation posited by numerous theorists to provide a source of economic benets to an organization see Brown and Dacin 1997 for a review of this literature Brown and Dacin 1997 nd that negative CSR perceptions are shown to exert negative effects on consumer behavior whilepositive CSR perceptions exert positive effects on consumer behavior They note that even though there is potential economic value in doing so it can be difcult to communicate corporate positions built around developing CSR associations a need potentially answered by CSR disclosures in the public forumHandelman and Arnold 1999 provide further evidence on wealth creation through marketing activities subsumed under CSR They suggest that consumers appear to possess a demand for intangible factors indicating congruence with local social norms and values and that the rms promotion of these elements may yield a strategic angle equal to that of competitive positioning and product attributesConsistent with Brown and Dacin 1997 they nd that negative institutional associations exert a signicant negative effect on customer perceptions and behavior and suggest that stakeholders have a minimal level of institutional actions below which even highly positioned rms begin to experience negative consequences Hooghiemstra 2000 suggests that CSR activity is a form of impression management for the rm This image management theory –which encompasses matters of corporate identity and corporate image – is likewise driven by direct economic concerns such as customer perceptions and access to capital markets The marketing-oriented literature on CSR activity suggests these actions are a strategic tool to build and maintain customer loyalty and market shareThe implications for disclosure are that the primary targets for information are the existing customers and members of the public with a general interest and that the content of the disclosure will be chosen to emphasize congruence with customer valuesPolitical economyA third theoretical approach considers these actions through the lens of the political economy Campbell et al 2003 Cormier and Gordon 2001 Deegan 2002Deegan and Gordon 1996Dowling and Pfeffer 1975 Gray et al 1995a Guthrie and Parker 1990 ODonovan 2002 Maignan and Ralston 2002 In this approach the rm is not considered to be an economic entity that can be divorced from its social context it is instead an organic organism that is a party to a social contract with the other members of its context For the rm to survive it must obtain the support and approval of its stakeholders whether those be primary stakeholders those without whose support the rm cannot function at all including customers suppliers or providers of labor and capital or secondary stakeholders who are indirectly afliated but in a position to signicantly inuence the rms success including regulators and media Clarkson 1995 CSR activity and the consequent disclosure is a part of the ongoing communication process required in order to enlist and maintain that support Gray et al 1995a Under this general heading researchers have variously advanced theoretical arguments based on stakeholder theory Clarkson1995Hooghiemstra 2000 Maignan and Ralston 2002 and on legitimation ie Campbell 2000Grayet al 1995a to explain both CSR activities and disclosureLegitimation pertains to efforts on the part of the rm to establish maintain or repair public perception of its dedication to stakeholder norms and values thus evincing respect for the social contract that permits it access to capital and labor markets and other economic resources necessary to ensure organizational survival Dowling and Pfeffer 1975 outline three means to establishing or improving legitimacy adapting operations to conform to existing societal expectations altering social denitions to conform with existing rm operations or engaging in communication to promote its public identication with socially legitimate symbols values and institutions The degree to which the organization is visible andor relies on social and political support drives the concern for legitimacy and consequent access to resources and support Dowling and Pfeffer 1975 A potential issue with applying legitimacy theory to CSR activity is that social norms and values are largely a function of temporal matters – as issues are brought to the attention of society they seem to replace other issues of prior focus Bird et al 2007 Campbell 2000 2003 Campbell et al 2003 Gray et al 1995a Guthrie and Parker 1990 Therefore for legitimacy theory to yield rmly testable hypotheses it must be possible to identify both the population with whom the rm is concernedwith establishing legitimacy and the values that the population holds at the specic point in timeSourceLori Holder-WebbJeffrey RCohenLeda NathDavid WoodThe Supply of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure Among US Firms [J]Journal of Business Ethics200984P497-527译文美国公司提供的企业社会责任信息披露引言企业社会责任活动这个领域在实际操作和学术前沿方面正受到越来越多的强烈关注投资者对于从事这些活动的公司的关注急遽地增长从1995年至2005年投资了专业的管理资产从7万亿美元上升到244万亿美元而这些资产的份额投资于社会责任从6390亿美元上升到29万亿美元社会投资论坛[SIF]2006 同时大型机构投资者和多方利益相关团体包括联合国负责投资项目的原则全球报告倡议组织GRI2006年以及投资者和公众的利益集团联盟CERES都集中关注社会和环境信息对股票分析的重要性社会责任投资SRI的资产的规模和增长带动了对信息需求的同步增长这项研究的目的是记录美国公司对企业社会责任的披露方式投资者并不是对这些唯一感兴趣的人士企业社会责任活动导致了人们对产品开发和市场实践的重视日益增加研究表明某些类型的企业社会责任活动对公司的品牌忠诚度和市场优势很有价值布朗和达欣1997森和巴塔查亚 2001正如汉德曼和阿诺德 1999第 36页提到的在任何社会中经常会发现有零售商向当地慈善机构捐赠赞助少年运动队并骄傲地展示国旗这些行动表明了这些零售商遵守着一种不成文但具有强烈约束性的社会行为规定比如密切联系社会各界并增强民族自豪感尽管关于究竟是什么促使企业参与到社会责任活动实践中来这个问题依然在研究当中从社会责任投资财产的增长和社会责任产品的消费者市场的扩大中显而易见的是对这些活动的信息需求传统财务信息通常强调的不是这些群体的需要这些群体需要的不仅仅是未来的收益还有公司社会与环境的职责与环境和家庭社区的相互作用亚当斯2004安德森等2005对非经济因素和股票回报率的关注导致了管理者加强问责制的需要根据SIF第五页占据主流意识的问题公司治理透明度问责制和加强信息披露早已成为社会投资工作的中心在这方面的工作大部分是针对欧洲和澳大利亚的研究几乎所有的多国研究表明在信息披露行为上存在国际差异在北美考米尔和麦格曼1999所提出的成本获利理论是用来应付环境的披露成本费用是指股东以外的其他各方将如何利用这些信息的信息成本成本获利是指在管理者和股东之间的信息不对称性减少考米尔和麦格曼1999测试了加拿大RMS的样本发现了这个变量例如一个资本市场和其股票成交量的依赖和环境信息披露的增加有关他们还得出结论环境信息披露是随着时间不断增加而在加拿大信息披露的增加可能可能会造成诉讼报告环境的减少但是在美国这是相反的纳扎尔2000年审查了1990年财富500强企业社会责任披露他发现规模和资本容量影响信息披露的质量和数量由于从纳扎尔2000研究时搜集的1990的数据以及考米尔和麦格南1999对加拿大公司的研究以来环境的披露已经发生了很大的变化所以目前还不清楚美国公司在21世纪如何应对日益增长的企业社会责任的信息需求此外以前的研究在评估企业社会责任信息披露的内容时主要集中在一个单一的报告格式通常是年度报告以及最近的公司网站等格雷等1995提出以供分析目的而使用单一格式可能在很大程度上限制了对企业社会责任披露行为产生的理解因此我们通过探索样本公司整个2004年期间公开披露的所有信息来扩展了这篇文章我们这篇文章主要的贡献是对直接评价给定类型的信息的传播强调方法的发展以前的研究在很大程度上依赖于作为重点代理的信息披露的频繁度在本文中我们评估社会和环境责任通常被称为企业责任会计或CSR在美国公司的一份样本中的报告状态由此确定什么类型的信息被提供并通过什么方式传播我们做了一份对50家公开上市的不同大小和行业的美国公司的披露做了一份内容分析结果表明企业社会责任信息是通过规定和各种自发媒体来披露的与以前的研究结果一致我们发现披露行为的差异是由规模和行业的不同导致的我们的研究结果表明美国公司的披露与其他全球企业相比在规模和数量上都有差异在下一节我们回顾了相关理论和研究并提出了研究问题和假设然后我们描述了研究方法以及讨论了结果我们对关于报告活动会计师事务所监管学者和对非财务信息的性质重新定义的学者的研究进行了总结文献综述问题研究和假设从学术和理论的角度去理清企业对从事企业社会责任活动的决定和为什么怎么以及何时对利益相关者报告这些活动之间的关系是很困难的研究者是否从经济或道德角度看企业社会责任问题决定了广泛理论框架的选择赛特德尔和赫索2007道德理论表明这些活动应当被推广因为他们是应当去做的正确的事经济学理论表明这些活动不仅应被推广到通过他们增加利润及创造股东财富的程度几乎所有推行的理论方法说明仅仅参与企业社会责任的行动是不够的因此对采取的行动的资料进行传播是十分必要的在理论中涉及的一个重大不同意义的问题是应该采取什么行动以及由谁来负责他们在一定程度上对的第一个以及第二个动因的回答是如果该活动的主要目标是争取一个特定派别的支持公司可能有通过各种渠道宣传活动达到这个派别要求的必要因此在发起披露情况的探索前我们提供了一个为什么要进行企业社会责任活动的简要概述伯德等人 2007 采用传统的经济学分析问题认为经理应该适应净现值 NPV 去分析所有潜在的企业社会责任活动并只执行有利于净现值的行动才能增加利益相关者的财富这个理论在企业社会责任语境的一个重要元素是古典概念即股东利益相关者是唯一重要的利益本研究发现市场渐渐忽视了评估的影响即无效模式伴随着多样性措施进入市场价格虽然作者并不能明确地考虑这件信息传播的重要暗示他们这种披露应该通过股东们习惯的渠道发生即托管的文档如年度报告和10-Ks 传统新古典方法在企业社会责任中运用有一个不确定的问题就是它不像生产决策那样企业社会责任活动及其结果可能不会放弃那个用数学就能容易解决的必要的可靠的净现值分析营销策略在营销文件中发现咨询的另一个分支说明企业社会责任主要可以被财富关系驱使见罗宾和瑞德巴赫1987年的一个广泛的调查文学布朗和达欣 1997 提供实证证据表明消费相信产品受公司所拥有的企业能力生产者的竞争优势和生产者的企业社会责任等有关信息的影响尽管企业社会责任制度通常与公司生产的能力毫无关系这两点都是创造一个良好的企业信誉的关键元素被大量的理论家假设可以带来组织经济利益见布朗和Dacin1997年的文献检阅布朗和达欣 1997 发现负面企业社会责任认知会对消费行为造成不良影响而正面的企业社会责任认知会对消费行为起到积极作用他们指出虽然这样做有潜在的经济价值但难以设立一个围绕发展企业社会责任协会的公司职位一个潜在的需要企业社会责任披露来回答的公共论坛汉德曼和阿诺 1999 提供进一步的证据表明可以通过企业社会责任这种营销活动创造财富他们建议当这个无形因素表明与当地社会规范与价值一致时该公司的推广这些元素可能会得到一种战略性视角从而在使得竞争中的定位和产品属性满足消费者的需求和布朗和达欣 1997 一样他们发现负面的制度组织会对顾客感知和行为产生负向影响建议利益相关者采取低于那些高位置的公司的最小的制度行动去体验负面后果霍格曼特 2000 表明企业社会责任活动是一种有效的公司管理这种形象管理理论包括企业个性和企业形象同样是被直接经济方面例如顾客感知和进入资本市场以市场为导向的文献在企业社会责任活动中建议这些行为是一种用来建立并维持顾客的忠诚度和市场份额的战略工具以披露为主要目标的信息会对客户和公众的兴趣产生影响并且我们披露的内容是经过挑选并强调与客户价值一致的政治经济学第三个理论方法通过政治经济的角度考虑这些行为坎贝尔等人2003考梅尔和戈登2001迪根2002Deegan和戈登1996道林和普弗佛1975格雷等人1995格思里和帕克1990奥多万诺2002麦格曼和拉斯顿2002 在这种方法中公司并不被认为是一个可以脱离其社会脉络的经济实体它代替一个有机的生物体和这个脉络的其他成员都是社会契约的当事人无论是主要的利益相关者没有他们的支持公司不可能正常运转包括客户供应商或劳动和资本提供者还是第二利益相关者那些间接参与但能够显著影响公司的人包括监管机构和媒体为了公司的生存必须得到利益相关者的支持和批准克拉克森1995 为了获得和维持支持企业社会责任活动和随之而来的披露是持续沟通过程的一个部分格雷等人1995在这个大标题下研究人员基于利益相关者理论克拉克森2000Hooghiemstra2000Maignan和拉斯顿2002 和合法化例如坎贝尔2000Grayet等人1995 提出各种先进的理论去解释企业社会责任活动和信息披露合法化在日后如在公司的建立维持等方面起很大作用公司为利益相关者准则和价值观的奉献重塑了这样的公众认知从而显出对社会契约尊重使公司得以进入资本和劳动力市场从而获得其他确保组织生存的必要经济资源道林和普弗佛1975列出三种方法建立或改善合法性用符合现有的社会期望去适应业务改变社会定义使其符合原有公司经营或者在和各类机构从事交流促进社会在公开合法符号价值观上进行认同和或依赖于社会和政治支撑驱使对合法性的关心以及相应的足够的资源和支持的程度对组织是可见的道林和普弗佛1975 在将合法性理论应用到企业社会责任活动中时有一个潜在的问题社会准则和价值观念主要是时间功能作为社会关注的问题时它们似乎取代其它问题成为焦点伯德等人2007坎贝尔20002003坎贝尔等人2003格雷等人1995格思里和帕克1990因此为了合法性理论能产生稳定的可测试假设必须确定建立合法性和价值观念的公司的人口以及他们在特定时间点拥有的价值是可以测定的出处洛瑞候德-韦布杰弗里科恩勒达纳特大卫伍德美国公司提供的企业社会责任信息披露[J]商业伦理杂志200984P497-527外文出处《Journal of Business Ethics》 200984P497-527外文作者 Lori Holder-WebbJeffrey RCohenLeda Nath David。
关于企业应该承担社会责任的英语作文
企业社会责任：企业与社会的和谐共生之道In the contemporary business world, the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has gained increasing significance. It represents a commitment made by organizations to operate in an ethical and sustainable manner, considering the interests of all stakeholders, including shareholders, employees, customers, communities, and the environment. This essay delves into the importance of CSR, its key components, and how enterprises can effectively embrace it to foster a harmonious coexistence with society.Firstly, CSR is fundamental to building trust and enhancing the reputation of businesses. In a highly competitive and transparent marketplace, customers and stakeholders are increasingly demanding ethical and sustainable practices from companies. By adhering to CSR principles, businesses demonstrate their commitment to ethical behavior, fostering trust among customers and investors, which ultimately leads to improved brand reputation and market competitiveness.Moreover, CSR contributes to sustainable developmentand environmental protection. As businesses grow and expand, their operations often have a significant impact on the environment and society. By integrating sustainability into their core strategies, companies can mitigate negative environmental impacts, reduce resource consumption, and promote environmental protection. This not only benefits society but also ensures the long-term viability of businesses, as sustainable practices often lead to cost savings and efficiency improvements.Furthermore, CSR is crucial for attracting andretaining top talent. Employees, especially the younger generation, are increasingly drawn to organizations that align with their values and prioritize social and environmental responsibility. By implementing CSR practices, businesses can create a positive work culture that attracts and retains talented individuals, who in turn contribute to the organization's success and growth.However, effectively implementing CSR requires a comprehensive approach. Companies need to identify and prioritize the CSR issues that are most relevant to theirbusiness and stakeholders. This could include issues suchas labor rights, community engagement, environmental impact, and ethical supply chains. Once these issues are identified, businesses should develop strategies and policies toaddress them, ensuring that CSR is integrated into all aspects of their operations.Moreover, collaboration and partnership are key to effective CSR implementation. Businesses can collaboratewith other organizations, governments, and communities to address shared CSR challenges and leverage collective resources and expertise. Such collaborations can lead to more impactful and sustainable outcomes, benefiting all stakeholders involved.In conclusion, Corporate Social Responsibility is not just a moral imperative but a strategic imperative for businesses in the modern era. By embracing CSR, companies can build trust, enhance their reputation, contribute to sustainable development, attract top talent, and foster a harmonious coexistence with society. The journey to implementing CSR effectively requires a comprehensive approach, prioritizing relevant issues, developingstrategies, and collaborating with stakeholders. As businesses continue to evolve and adapt to the changing landscape, CSR will remain a critical component of their success and sustainability.**企业社会责任：企业与社会的和谐共生之道**在当代商业世界中，企业社会责任（CSR）的概念日益受到重视。
企业社会责任重要性的英语作文
The Crucial Importance of CorporateSocial ResponsibilityIn the modern business landscape, the significance of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become increasingly pronounced. CSR refers to the commitment of organizations to behave ethically and contribute to the economic, environmental, and social well-being of their stakeholders. It involves not only adhering to legal requirements but also going beyond them to promote positive impacts on society. The importance of CSR is multifaceted, spanning from enhancing brand reputation to fostering sustainable development.Firstly, CSR is vital for enhancing a company's brand reputation and public image. Consumers, investors, and other stakeholders are increasingly demanding that businesses operate in a responsible and sustainable manner. By engaging in CSR activities, companies demonstrate their commitment to ethical and sustainable practices, which in turn enhances their credibility and trustworthiness. This positive perception can translate into increased customer loyalty, higher sales, and improved shareholder value.Moreover, CSR is instrumental in fostering sustainable development. By integrating environmental and social considerations into their business strategies, companies can contribute to addressing global challenges such as climate change, social inequality, and poverty. By reducing their environmental impact, adopting sustainable practices, and investing in social initiatives, businesses can help create a more resilient and inclusive society.Furthermore, CSR is beneficial for attracting and retaining talent. Employees, especially the younger generation, are increasingly drawn to organizations that align with their values and are committed to making a positive impact on society. By investing in CSR, companies can create a more engaging and fulfilling work environment that attracts top talent and enhances employee satisfaction and loyalty.However, it is important to note that CSR should not be viewed as a mere public relations gimmick or a way to avoid legal scrutiny. It should be a genuine commitment toethical and sustainable practices that are integrated into the core of the organization's operations and strategies.Moreover, CSR should be tailored to the specific context and needs of the company and its stakeholders, ensuring that it is relevant and impactful.In conclusion, corporate social responsibility is crucial for modern businesses. It not only enhances brand reputation and public image but also contributes to sustainable development and attracts top talent. By integrating CSR into their core operations and strategies, companies can create positive impacts on society while simultaneously achieving their business objectives.**企业社会责任的重要性**在当今商业环境中，企业社会责任（CSR）的重要性日益凸显。
企业社会责任英文原文加翻译
企业社会责任英文原文加翻译一(英文原文Moral Discourse and Corporate Social Responsibility ReportingBy MaryAnn Reynolds, Kristi YuthasABSTRACTThis paper examines voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting as a form of moral discourse. It explores how alternative stakeholder perspectives lead to differing perceptions of the process and content of responsible reporting. We contrast traditional stakeholder theory, which views stakeholders as external parties having a social contract with corporations, with an emerging perspective, which views interaction among corporations and constituents as relational in nature. This moves the stakeholder from an external entity to one thatis integral to corporate activity. We explore how these alternative stakeholder perspectives give rise to different normative demands for stakeholder engagement, managerial processes, and communication. We discuss models of CSR reporting and accountability: EMAS, the ISO 14000 series, SA8000, AA1000, the Global Reporting Initiative, and the Copenhagen Charter. We explore how these models relate to the stakeholder philosophies and find that they are largely consistent with the traditional atomistic view but fall far short of the demands for moral engagement prescribed by a relational stakeholder perspective. Adopting a relational view requires stakeholder engagement not only inprescribing reporting requiremenu, but also in discourse relating to core aspects of the corporation such as mission,values,and management systems, Habermas' theory of communicative action provides guidelinesfor engaging stakeholders in this moral discourse.KEY WORDS: stakeholder engagement, stakeholder reporting, relational stakeholder perspective, corporate social responsibility,Theoryof Communicative Action,discourse ethicsIntroductionThroughout this paper, we use Habermas' theory of communicative action (1984, 1987, 1990) as a means through which to critique current approaches corporate the degree menu forsocial responsibility reporting in terms to which these reports embody require moral discourse. We provide a brief introduction to key elements of the theory and ground it in social theory. We then discuss the details as they apply to CSR reporting.Our analysis is conducted in two stages, relying on different portions ofHabermas' theory. In the first part, we examine the conditions that allow for basic communicative understanding. These conditions are the unspoken assumptions underlying communication. In normal communication, four basic universal assumptions are made: that the speaker is telling the truth, that he means what he says, and that what he says is appropriate in its context, and that it is understandable to the listener. In the first part of the paper, we show how models orframeworks for CSR reporting, taken together, address these assumptions and contribute to the effectiveness of CSR reports as a form of communication.In the second part of our analysis, we rely upon the ethical aspects of Habermas' theory as a means through which to provide a normative critique of the body of CSR reporting frameworks. The theory of communicative action suggests that social progress can be accomplished through rational discourse under specific conditions. The discourse must be inclusive, democratic, and free of power asymmetries. Apel (1980) has suggested that the ethical nature of an agreement derives from theprocess used to arrive at that agreement (rather than universal or externally-imposed ethical standards).We use Habermas' principles as a means to examine the extent to corporate communication is reflective of moral discourse.We find that while the frameworks generally promote stakeholder consultation,they fall short of providing other conditions needed for moral discourse. In particular, they fail to provide mechanisms that allow stakeholders with differing resources to participate democratically in discourse.The paper is organized as follows. First,we introduce social responsibility and corporate disclosure concepts related to CSRreporting.Next,we explore widely-used frameworks associated with corporate accountability in the CSR realm. Then, as noted above, we provide a 2-part analysis of how concepts from Habermas' theory of communicative action are currently realized in guidance provided by CSR reporting models. We close with concluding rem arks.Background: social responsibility and corporate disclosureCorporate social responsibility is addressed in current business, accounting and ethics literature. The issue was widely discussed in the seventies and early eighties and then dropped out of sight. The current re-energized focus includes social, environmental and ethical reporting by corporations. The notion of corporate social disclosure arises from a view of social theory which holds that the corporation owes a duty to the society; or has a social contract. One widely cited quotation comes from Shocker and Sethi (1974, p.67):"Any social institution一and business in no exception一operates in societyvia a social contract, expressed or implied, whereby its survival and growth are based on:1 .The delivery of some socially desirable ends to society ingeneral and,2. The distribution of economic, social or political benefits to groups from which it derives its power.In a dnamic society, neither the sources of institutional power nor the needs for its services are permanent. Therefore, an institution must constantly meet the twintests of legitimacy and relevance by demonstrafing that society requires its services and that the groups benefiting from its rewards have society's approval."Carroll and Bucholtz offer a four part definition of corporatesocial responsibility, "The social responsibility of business encompasses the economic, legal,ethical, and discretionary (philanthropic) expectadons that society has of organizations at a given point in time (2006, p. 35)." This definition reflects current thinking on corporate social responsibility and acknowledges the need to note shifts in social environment, these may be social, legal, or political.Corporate investors are questioning the adequacy of this communication approach and have called for increased reporting on issues of broad societal interest. Presently it is estimated that trillions of dollars are allocated to investments based on some social criteria (Sparkes and Cowton, 2004). Confulion may arise with the lack of comparable reporting.Implementable guidelines have consequently been developed by groups proposing models or frameworks for reporting (communicating) and auditing (verifying). Leading examples in order they were first issued are:EMAS (European, particularly German environmental management and audit)ISO 14001(Internationally recognized environmental managementcertification)SA 8000 (Social Accountability Internationallabor standard).AA1000 (International accountability assurante reporting standard).Copenhagen Charter(International standard involving stakeholdercommunications).GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) 2000 (International sustainability report).Models for corporate social responsibility reportingApproaches to social and natural environmental accountability have been developed for various purposes. Classifying them under the umbrella of CSR reporting we will discuss some widely used models and introduce a less well-known model, which may provide additional benefit.Eco-Management and Audit Scheme ( EMAS, 1995,2001)The European Commission set down the basic principles underlying the EMAS scheme in Council Regulation 1836/93 -EMAS of the European Commission. The purpose was improvement of environmental performance and was initially directed at manufacturing firms. This has since been extended to allow broad participation by any public or private entity wishing to participate. The regulation calls for an environmental statement from the entity and requires auditing.Further,there is a continual requirement to document ongoing continual improvement through the of implementation policies, programmes and management systems by a systematic, objective, and periodic evaluation of performance. There is also an obligation to inform the public of the results of the evaluation.The article on participation states that the scheme is open topublic or privateentities operating in the EU or the European Economic Area (EEA).The site may be registered if the site has an environmental policy, asite review, an environmental audit,objectives for continuousimprovement, a statement from each site, verification covering poficy, programmes, the management system, the review and audit procedure, and the statement provided. The validated environmental statement is then forwarded to the competent body in the Member State. The statement is also disseminated to the public after the registration of the site has been completed. The statement should be a concise, comprehensible description of activities at the site; with an assessment of significant relevant environmental issues, including: emissions, waste generation, consumption of raw materials, energy and water, noise and other significant aspects; a presentation of the company's environmental poficy, programme and management system at the site, the deadline for the next statement, and the name of the accredited environmental verifier. The EMAS 2001 was strengthened by requiring ISO 14001 as the environmental management system.Council on Economic Priorities Accreditation Agency Social Accountability Standard (SA8000, 1998)/renamed Social Accountability International (SAI)This standard has a change in focus and is concerned with fair labor practices world wide. It is divided into purpose and scope, normative elements and their interpretation, definitions,and social accountability requirements.The social accountability requirements include: child labor,forced labor, health and safety, freedom of associanon and right to collective bargaining, discrimination, disciplinary practices, working hours,compensation, management systems, management review,company representatives,planning and implementation, control of suppliers, addressing concerns and taking corrective action, outside communication, access for verification and anizationschoosing to adopt this standard are encouraged to require theirsuppliers to comply with its requirements also. This extends it widelyinto global society. Organizations can adopt these standards voluntarily and may disclose their tompliance with the provisions of the standard as part of other statements issued.Institute of Social and Ethical Accountability Standard AA1000 (1999) The first standard for building corporate accountability and trustwas issued in November 1999 by the Institute of Social and Ethical Accountability (ISEA).The ISEA states that the AA 1000standard“provides both a framework that organizationscan use to understand and improve their ethical performance and a means to judge the validity of ethical claims made." The AA1000 standardis described as:an Accountability standard, focused on quality of social and ethical accounting,reporting. securing the auditing and reporting”AA1000 comprises principles (the characteristics of anquality process) and a set of process standards. Thebprocess standards cover planning, accounting,auditing and reporting, embedding, and stakeholder engagement (AA1000, 1999, p. 1).The focus is on improving overall performance through measurement, quality management, recruitment and retention of employees, external stakeholder engagement, partnership, risk management, investors,governance, government and regulatory relations and training (AA1000, 1999, pp. 3-4).Auditing and quality assurance are required as a part of the system. The users of AA1000 are expected to include adopting organizations, stakeholders, service providers, and standards developers. Thus we see the inclusion of societal stakeholders as constituents.Concluding remarksIn this paper, we have adopted the relational view of stakeholders suggested by the theory of pragmatism.Under this perspective, CSR reporting becomes part of an ongoing discourse between a corporation and its stakeholders, rather than one-way communication about past performance. We use Habermas' theory of communicative action to provide guidance on how this discourse can be conducted in a manner that leadsto morally justifiable outcomes. We examine how Habermasian principles are approximated in existing reporting models such as EMAS,ISO, SA 8000, AA 1000, and The Copenhagen Charter.The widespread voluntary adoption of various reporting models allows decision makers interested in social responsibility to evaluate corporations using this information in the context of a perceived social contract. The use of frameworks that approximate principles of communicative action allows investigation not only of reported outcomes, but also of the processes involved.Based on our examination of corporate social responsibilityreporting models currently in use, we conclude that progress is being made in CSR reporting, and communication. Models exist that enablecorporations to report on their social, environmental, and ethical performance. The existing models discussed in this paper offer opportunity for some transparency and greatly enhance the ability for broader stakeholders to compare companies and their performance in these critical arenas. However,the models do not quite move to the level of ethical discourse through which social progress might be achieved. We believe that a different philosophical perspective, making stakeholders an intrinsic part of the discourse rather than peripheral to the process,and engaging them in discourse that is open, fair, and democratic would move society toward moral corporate discourse.Several of the models examined offer aspects that lead in this direction. Modifications of frameworks and frameworks in progress, such as the SA1000 Stakeholder Engagement Standard, provide evidence that corporations and their constituents recognize that corporate accountability is supported by effective stakeholder engagement. As reporting on CSR performance encourages performance improvements,we believe that the same holds for moral discourse.Ascompanies move toward greater transparency in the processes and outcomes of stakeholder discourse, we expect movement toward ideal speech and moral communicative outcomes.。
关于中国企业社会责任的英文作文
关于中国企业社会责任的英文作文Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is becoming increasingly important for Chinese companies. As China's economy continues to grow, businesses are being held to higher standards in terms of their impact on society and the environment. In this essay, I will discuss the significance of CSR for Chinese companies and the various ways in which they can fulfill their social responsibilities.Firstly, it is important to understand why CSR is important for Chinese companies. In today's globalized world, companies are no longer judged solely on their financial performance, but also on their social and environmental impact. Consumers, investors, and other stakeholders are increasingly demanding transparency and accountability from businesses. Therefore, companies that demonstrate a commitment to CSR are more likely to attract and retain customers, employees, and investors, which can ultimately lead to long-term success and sustainability.There are several ways in which Chinese companies can fulfill their social responsibilities. One way is through philanthropy, such as donating to charitable causes or supporting community development projects. Another way is through environmentalsustainability, by reducing their carbon footprint, conserving resources, and minimizing waste. Companies can also promote ethical labor practices by ensuring fair wages and safe working conditions for their employees.In addition to these initiatives, Chinese companies can also contribute to society by participating in social welfare programs and supporting education, healthcare, and poverty alleviation efforts. By investing in their communities and supporting social causes, companies can build stronger relationships with their stakeholders and enhance their reputation as responsible corporate citizens.It is encouraging to see that an increasing number of Chinese companies are recognizing the importance of CSR and taking proactive steps to fulfill their social responsibilities. However, there is still room for improvement, particularly in terms of transparency and accountability. Companies need to be more transparent about their CSR initiatives and outcomes, and they need to be held accountable for their social and environmental impact.In conclusion, CSR is an important aspect of business that Chinese companies cannot afford to ignore. By fulfilling their social responsibilities, companies can enhance their reputation,attract and retain stakeholders, and contribute to the well-being of society and the environment. It is my hope that more Chinese companies will embrace CSR and make a positive impact on the world.。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
企业的社会责任：一种趋势和运动，但社会责任是什么，是为了什么？1企业社会责任（CSR ）已成为一个全球趋势，涉及企业，国家，国际组织和民间社会组织。
但这远远不能清楚CSR的主张，有什么真正的趋势，是从哪里开始，在哪里发展，谁是项目的主要行动者。
如果把它作为一种社会运动，我们必须要问：什么运动和谁执行？讨论有助于我们反思形成的趋势和如何管理某些特点来迅速和广泛地在全球各地进行扩展，并增加了以下体制变革,特别是对变化中国家之间、企业法人和民间社会组织关系之间的界限的作用。
企业社会责任的趋势在三个方面：作为一个管理框架，新的要求，地方企业;作为动员企业行为，以协助国家的发展援助;和作为管理趋势。
每一个这些画像表明，中心的某些行为，关系，驾驭团队和利益。
我的例子表明，没有人对这些意见似乎比别人更准确，而是，活动包括规范的不同利益、作用因素、起源和轨迹。
这些多重身份的趋势可以部分描述其成功以及它的争论，脆弱性和流动性。
许多公司现在有具体的计划和小节在其网站上处理企业社会责任。
在过去，软条例和指导网络，国际公认的规则一直是一种重要机制，作用在公司、国家和国家间组织的需求，例如，发布指导方针和条例的公司。
在这背景下，国际组织仍然是重要的行动者，他们正在寻求与跨国公司进行对话，而不是试图通过国家控制企业社会责任。
各国际组织不是对企业的社会责任监管机构;而他们却是监管和自我约束的倡议之间的经纪人的最合适人选。
对社会负责行为和监测这些行为的需求越来越多地以国家以外的这些组织为渠道，并强调赞成高比例的自律。
因此，我们看到了软法律(Morth, 2004)的出现，或者是Knill 和Lehmkuhl (2002) 所说的“被规管的自律”，和Moran (2002)所归纳的“精细”或“非正式”规章。
我更喜欢“软法律”和“软规章”的说法，因为他们并不总是非正式的。
软规章常常包括正式报告和统筹程序。
还有，从统筹和行政的观点来看，那些规章和精细还是相去甚远的。
社会责任的措施和规章在公司和他们的利益相关者之间的对话中发展。
联合国全球契约是发展中的软规章框架的中心。
它是自愿的，没有法律约束力的制裁。
适用于没有遵守规章并被笼统制定的企业。
它为理解条例提供许多余地，从而以适合它们自身情况和期待的某种方式，实现将规章转化为行动的改变。
该倡议是建立在菜单上的书面原则基础上的国际宣言和协定的成员契约遵循。
然而，契约本身并不是一个法律框架。
此倡议依赖于承诺，信誉和能见度遵守，而不是对不符合原则的企业发出明确的制裁。
全球契约从全球影响力和道德权威的联合国和增列角色创建社区发出的原则，增长其信誉。
软规则，换言之，是嵌套在更广泛的监管范围（Jacobsson和萨赫林-安德森，2006年），更说明了一个事实，即目前还不清楚，结合这些条例以及在何种程度上可以预料，从而遵守或将保持疲软。
联合国全球契约,已形成过程中通过响应规则。
2004年的夏天,一个十原理产生广泛的在协商过程。
此外,大量的重点放在形成什么被称为“学习网络”和“政策对话”。
大量的会议,安排定期商界领袖、联合国机构、政府的代表,劳工协会,非政府组织和其他团体、学者、都聚集了来讨论和分享他们的经验和关心的具体问题。
全球紧凑的进一步鼓励产生的局部结构和网络的国家区域的水平。
参赛者来自丹麦，芬兰，挪威和瑞典已经形成了全球契约北欧网络为例，探讨了实现的原理。
努力扩大主要是为了扩大网络招聘和活化成员及其它跨国组织形成合作关系。
这些网络和对话的目标,为全球契约的网站上公布，在推动学习的演员和部门。
参与公司在全球契约要求提供的例子是如何工作的，按照积极推广十原则。
组织者现在全球契约当作学习的网络和一个后面的报告是存在野心的，为最佳实践提供了范例。
最近，全球已经强调赞成学术著作标准化的报告的标准。
最佳实践的案例是由学术的学者全球契约，张贴在网站上。
科学和学术参考作为一个合法化的设备和手段的平衡,出现在网络的依赖性有价值的独立与科学和审计。
似乎有一种视觉形式的社区中，每个参与者个人演员努力显得适当的关系网络和其他成员对他们的利益相关者的立场，他们根据律。
为鼓励人们的机制,坚持准则是，因此，包括他们的小组，来说服他们，关键是要有一个好的该组织内部的名字，达到一个高水平的合法性的努力，在作为一个整体事实上，一定程度的合法性,信号到更广泛的观众，团队成员定义、对社会负责。
最后，既包含紧凑像强调的名字的主动权。
一个逻辑的适用性(1981年3月)作为管理策略：紧凑的重要性，强调个人演员出现，它是适当的规范旨在使看得见的适用性和合规或缺乏。
开发类似于一个社会运动，它是依靠自己的演员。
为了让这样一个网络功能有效的、积极参与成员是至关重要的。
相反于这种理想的设定紧凑,这个网站，见证公司的放松和不活跃的参与。
积极组织的会议和网络视为一种发起人调动会员为建立一个更活跃的运动。
还有其他的方法中，全球契约提醒我们的社会运动或使用汪宏年的(2002)术语模式转向网络。
作为其代表强调，“全球契约办公室不规范和监控公司文件和行动”(Kell，2003年3月，p38)。
范围的动员、政策制定、报告和监测机构正在形成网络。
这整个网络,不是个体的规则和规则制定者形式监管框架。
这个目标是为了保持网络的演员一起共同原则、程序和规范。
那些在冲突或那些不遵守规则内没有受到惩罚系统。
因此柔性的规定存在的假设，将共同规范中这些连接网络来判断对方相对于既定的规则和程序。
虽然可能有共同利益之初，希望是这些包括在网络来分享共同规范。
包含机制建立在视觉上的更大更广泛的这个网络，更重要的是它会的是为企业，依赖于他们的利益相关者，加入网络向他人显示他们遵守其规章。
那些没有遵守原则的，仅仅被责备和羞辱，而没有接受正规的制裁。
延长网络是建立在全球契约包含了大量的主动关心的企业公民,企业社会责任和相关问题。
它包含大量多样，包括政府机构组织为世界银行、国际经济合作与发展组织，商业协会(例如国际商会及世界贸易委员会对可持续发展),劳动组织(例如国际联合会的自由贸易协定)、学术机构、民间组织。
另外,主动离开纪律的独立观察者学者、非政府组织、独立的媒体——观察和细究这个措施，用手指责备那些超越规则界限的行为。
鼓励公民社会组织细看社会责任感的企业，全球形成一种治理结构紧凑而不需要运用法律框架。
在这个指南为会员，贴在全球契约的网站,Corpwatch及其他公民社会组织已知愈发细看公司和全球化被称为活性检查操作的全球契约和它的成员的迹象,积极进行审查。
通过与这些更关键的演员,主动进一步合法化。
这些组织预计扮演重要的角色检查监视器和批判的公司的演员和公司遵循建立的原则。
另一种和补充的独立观察员和活动中不可或缺的部分的管理和治理结构是建立具有独立性的监测系统。
这样一个系统的会计的这些方面生意的全球报告倡议(世源科技公司)，正在发展。
世源科技公司自己描述其网站作为“多方利益过程和独立机构的使命是去可持续发展和推广全球报告准则”放之四海而皆准。
这个主办了多方利益过程具有永久性，独立的组织自从1997年全球总部位于荷兰阿姆斯特丹。
致力于发展的困扰一个报告制度与国际会计准则委员会和达到一定水平的报告的经济效益、环境效益和社会的可持续发展，将作为常规财务报告。
一个框架协定全球契约世源科技公司成立，于2003年3月，在全球契约同意鼓励公司使用指南和报告指标，世源科技公司现有匹配全球契约的原则。
延长网络的报告、规范、规则设定和监控组织已经连接到全球契约。
例如，世源科技公司和全球契约已经宣布，他们与社会和环境标准的联系。
SA8000和ISO14000。
监督和治理模式和发展伴随着新元素的演变，以相互之间伴随着相关的监督管理,控制相互作用和批判的作用力。
法规和治理具有相互作用的规范。
CSR作为监管框架：影响组织和跨界别的关系有一种特殊的社会趋势的抗议活动演变与公民社会的关注组织。
公司已经推出计划，应用标准和带着积极参与开发此类标准的回应新的要求和新形式的监控。
它是一种管理框架。
公司的主要目标，开始出现了主要驱动因素的趋势。
其他组织或多或少都动员作为这个公司的环境的因素。
国家和政府间国际组织担任在公司的渠道，要求地方要求，也被表达公民社会组织。
这个组织的努力与国际组织把这些要求背后的合法性和力量被包装他们的形式全球标准和报告的标准，通过基于联合国框架，通过将他们与建立、规范和协议。
这样的运动建立并将会进一步强调了三者之间关系国家、国际组织、企业、国家有望形式制度框架内，维护公司的行为。
这个原因形成这种监管框架是薄弱的，而不是努力是基于框架似乎无法完成和国家法规，不得有接受那些调节(公司)及他们的利益相关者。
因此，把重点放在柔软的条例，出现了全球性的权力力量的跨国公司。
因为公司有这样的力量这个世界,他们的最基本的人性、工人和环境的权利积极发展所必需的深化企业社会责任的世界。
辩论中心应符合标准的实现谁应该监控，达到符合处罚不遵守的行为。
然而，也有不同的方式，在各种行动者追赶CSR。
一个区别有关的其他相关企业社会责任活动，并要求对公司的业务。
在企业的需求行为以及培养社会责任方面所做的努力与调节和审查从这些要求，是用来关注整个公司在世界的运作方式。
另一方面，当企业社会责任是追求作为公司在协助美国动员工作的发展援助，它可能不关心整个公司，而这似乎是组织形式，在特定的项目，经常瞄准非常遥远的地方和部门。
再者，作为管理的趋势，企业社会责任似乎主要是与演示和连接在公司的合法性建设，我们可以预期，根据以往的研究大量的结合发生。
当谈到跨界别的界限，商业和关系公司和公民社会组织、三大趋势似乎也需要之间的差异。
第一个趋势，这对公司的新要求，似乎是建立在和强化相对传统的责任，在社会领域美国提供了游戏的规则和公司按照这些规则。
美国与国际组织的规则制定者的范围内做点公益和介质的更广泛的需求导致冲突和紧张的公司应该在谁的规则和谁应该监督他们。
但这样的冲突并不独特的社会领域。
第二个趋势，入口的大公司进入交割的援助来发展国家，似乎是驾驶多点的界限，其中公司不仅是期望遵循规则，并期望和由其他要求，但实际上是期望补充和添加到国家和政府间国际组织，在那里，他们到达和力量似乎太有限。
在第三管理，我们看到了一个趋势中发挥更积极的作用，由运营商概念、模型、期望和演讲比通常被认为是这个案子。
再次，这并非独一无二，它还代表被发现的情况管理与组织发展的趋势更加普遍。
这种现象，然而，重要性阐述了跨部门的发展模式更进一步关系，中介机构之间的关系;并规范和标准企业家、组织平台和管理技术。